Support NeoGAF

[BriGuy]

I guess that explains the go-pro cameras they were allegedly wearing. Go murder some "infidels" and post the carnage online to embolden other would-be jihadists.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a rash of copycat attacks in the coming weeks.

 

[Ljx718]

I would say that's the main issue, but we can't deny that there is a problem with radicalization of ceratain extremist elements, and the US is not immune to this.

That said, I don't think Trump's registry/deportation/wall scheme is the way. I wonder if we could actually prevent radicalization if we accepted more refugees and tried to turn down the Islamophobia in the US.

how is gun control the main issue when US has always had guns and with less regulations? Just cus events like this are more public, it doesnt discount that violent crime, murders, gun violence, are all on a down ward trend.

could it be, JUST MAYBE, we should look into why these people are doing these things and try to solve those? over 300 million firearms in america and a select few (criminals) do these things.

 

[PJV3]

I don't know either but we've seen it happening quite a lot, even with comfy living teenagers from UK and other first world countries leaving to join ISIS. I guess it must be a case by case thing, each with their personal reasons or void to fill.

The girl in the Guardian other day was a creepy story, she just posted a picture of herself in a veil, and the extemists almost had her on a flight to Syria.

Thankfully she somehow snapped out of it.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Ludicrous?? Half of the people currently running for office on the GOP side would probably do it today. Again, I'm not arguing for its merits, merely that it's a real possibility.

Again, any nuked dropped will result in mutually assured destruction. NO ONE wants to be responsible for that will bring.

Ugh. If this is true, it's so disheartening. It emboldens the people who believe any random Muslim is capable of these acts of horror. And frankly, it is a little scary.

Well, immediately post 9/11 this was happening. I recall reports being made of Muslims being attacked by angry Americans.

 

[DudeWithNoName]

I don't think ISIS will endorse an attack on a facility treating people with disabilities. If for no other reason than the bad PR.

edit: also, do we know if any of the individuals killed were muslim?

Well, since there are pictures out there of ISIS soldiers holding armloads of children's heads...I don't think they give a shit.

 

[ginger ninja]

The green parts:

Raqqa, for starters.

The hotbed of radicalization.

Jesus. I can't even tell if some of you are joking or not. Yea lets nuke the radicals into submission, that will make sure they never retaliate. Just like launching a war that is haunting us to this day.
Plus, talk about proportionate response. Extremists kill 10-150 people in one shot, we take out thousands in one plus the thousand more civilians and million more radicalized as an effect.
I cannot fucking believe we are actually discussing this here. fucking twilight zone shit.

edit: I also can't believe that this shit is being tolerated at gaf. One dude is literally saying nuke Muslim countries for revenge. Unless he is joking. You can never really tell on this forum at times.

 

[ColdPizza]

Oh, there's another solution. No one wants to do it, but it may come to it.

Which is?

 

[Little Green Yoda]

And their lack of taking of credit for the attack is equally strange. Guess we'll find out as more details continue to come out.

Moreover, ISIS hasn't taken credit for this, which they're usually quick to do so.

Didn't it take a while before they claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks? There were pundits speculating that those attacks were possibly Al-Qaeda instead.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

Has their been any evidence so far to prove that they received direct help from ISIS, or were they just inspired by them? I'm not sure which is worse though.

This is whole situation is terrifying. If only we could figure out what convinced these people that they needed to do this.

She's from Pakistan, it's obvious that it's not home grown, at least in America.

 

[DarkHeartedKill]

I don't think ISIS will endorse an attack on a facility treating people with disabilities. If for no other reason than the bad PR.

edit: also, do we know if any of the individuals killed were muslim?

ISIS basically kills anyone that doesn't believe in the same ideology as them. They don't see the type to make exceptions.

 

[Calamari41]

Which is?

He already explained that he wants to nuke the Paris suburbs or something

 

[PopeReal]

Great contribution

You are welcome. Tell me why I should be so afraid of foreign terrorists? Domestic ones pose a more serious threat but there is nothing being done about it.

 

[The Artisan]

The first mistake was allowing the ISIS propaganda machine to run full steam without any attempt to stop it. Regions controlled by ISIS should zero access to electricity, that would be a start.

Edit- wasn't there an ISIS sympathizer on Gaf at one point? Mods might want look in the ban log and start submitting Tips

the fuck? Seriously?

 

[foxtrot3d]

The first mistake was allowing the ISIS propaganda machine to run full steam without any attempt to stop it. Regions controlled by ISIS should zero access to electricity, that would be a start.

Edit- wasn't there an ISIS sympathizer on Gaf at one point? Mods might want look in the ban log and start submitting Tips

I can't tell if this is sarcasm.

 

[LiquidSword]

I guess that explains the go-pro cameras they were allegedly wearing. Go murder some "infidels" and post the carnage online to embolden other would-be jihadists.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a rash of copycat attacks in the coming weeks.

This was a rumor. No go pros or cameras were found on them.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Didn't it take a while before they claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks? There were pundits speculating that those attacks were possibly Al-Qaeda instead.

They've said that they attackers were basically inspired by ISIS, but they got the number of attackers wrong (3 instead of 2). Decent evidence, right now, to show that they found out about this at the same time as us.

 

[ColdPizza]

well NYT reported Syed was making $70,000/year. Seems like it would be pretty easy to pay for $30,000 of weapons especially as the first gun was bought 3 years ago.

I'm not saying they didn't have financial help but it's easily possible they paid for everything themselves. If you live frugally and don't eat out I think you could easily live off $25,000/year or so between 2 people.

You could easily charge stuff if you have no intention of ever paying it back.

 

[CraigerGamer]

how is gun control the main issue when US has always had guns and with less regulations? Just cus events like this are more public, it doesnt discount that violent crime, murders, gun violence, are all on a down ward trend.

could it be, JUST MAYBE, we should look into why these people are doing these things and try to solve those? over 300 million firearms in america and a select few (criminals) do these things.

Access to guns is part of the answer because the country has gashed its states' mental health budgets to the bone. You have people who aren't getting services they need, disgruntled, with easy access to weapons of destruction. Yes, USA has always had a hands-off attitude with guns, but there had also been a strong support structure for its citizens until about 10 years ago. What we are seeing in this country is the fruit of the conscience decision of under-funding public services due to recession/greed/need for increase profits. The chances of getting mental health services back in state's budgets is a decade a way, at best. So limiting access to murder tools is a short term solution.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

The first mistake was allowing the ISIS propaganda machine to run full steam without any attempt to stop it. Regions controlled by ISIS should zero access to electricity, that would be a start.

Edit- wasn't there an ISIS sympathizer on Gaf at one point? Mods might want look in the ban log and start submitting Tips

They can just run gas generators for electricity, it's not like they would care about climate change...

 

[captive]

Right, but we're talking about ISIS. It didn't need fixing.

well, the further point, which should be obvious to most, is that your far more likely to die from a white male with a gun in a mass shooting event than ISIS.

Nevermind the fact that these two obtained at least some of if not all of their guns legally. So them being muslim terrorist doesn't really matter.

 

[Ether_Snake]

They can just run gas generators for electricity, it's not like they would care about climate change...

Yeah sure power a whole city on generators.

 

[SyenceLabb]

well, the further point, which should be obvious to most, is that your far more likely to die from a white male with a gun in a mass shooting event than ISIS.

Nevermind the fact that these two obtained at least some of if not all of their guns legally. So them being muslim terrorist doesn't really matter.

Well, of course you're more likely to die by the hands of a white male - You're comparing an entire race of people to a terrorist organization.

 

[dave is ok]

well, the further point, which should be obvious to most, is that your far more likely to die from a white male with a gun in a mass shooting event than ISIS.

Why are Americans so afraid of brown guys with guns? We seem pretty indifferent to white guys slaughtering people.

Of the 353 mass shootings this year, how many would you guess were white males?

 

[pxleyes]

Of the 353 mass shootings this year, how many would you guess were white males?

I'd like to know the answer to that stat, but my guess it upwards of 80%.

 

[PopeReal]

Of the 353 mass shootings this year, how many would you guess were white males?

Who cares? My point is that we don't do anything about it so why are we expected to freak out when ISIS is involved? We can't expect to have gun control work for scary terrorists only.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

This is pretty much what I've been thinking for a while now. It wasn't directed or commanded by ISIL or Al Qaeda but these two were self radicalized and inspired by extremist propaganda. Possibly through internet communication as well.

 

[Ljx718]

I find it funny that you guys think illegal arms are not a thing. lets say that all guns are banned in the US 100% like there are in other countries.

1. do you porpose that the government goes house to house to take guns (over 300 million legally purchased guns, unknown ILLLEGAL guns)
2. criminals wont commit violent crimes with their illegal guns
3. take away rights from law biding citizens to protect them selves, their hobbies, etc.


in my view, criminals will always have access to weapons. Look at mexico, firearms are banned there. Regular people cannot defend themselves and its has one of the highest murder rates in the world. GUESS WHAT criminals still have weapons.

a lot of people are uneducated when it comes to gun laws that are in place NOW.

1. fully automatic (pull trigger and shots are fired without stopping until you let go or no more rounds in magazine) weapons were banned in the 1980s. any that you see now, are illegal or they have been sold privately. usually well above $25k or more cus you cant get new ones

2. "semi-automatic weapons" is just a scary sounding term for what it really means. you pull the trigger once, 1 shot fires.

3. there are no "loop holes" to get guns. You can buy online, but it has to be shipped to a store with an FFL license which then runs a background check . at a gun show, you have to get a background check. there is already a "cool off" period in place which varies by state.

4. private sales need no back ground check becuase its impossible to track who sells their property.

5. magazine limits are already a thing

people want to ban "assault rifles" when they dont even know what that means. an AR15 (semi automatic) is not an assault rifle. Hunting rifles, which people say they dont want to ban has a way more powerfull projectile that will travel way further does all the same thing an AR does. its just not black and "scary" looking.

people overlook that the vast majority of gun violence/firearm deaths are from hand guns.

im sure i forgot a lot of things to put in there, but i like to let ppl know some facts before they start talking about something they are ignorant on.

please ask me any questions you may have.

 

[Zornack]

I'd like to know the answer to that stat, but my guess it upwards of 80%.

...are you serious?

 

[ElTorro]

You don't have to part of an organization to adopt its ideology.

That's why I've come to believe that the most important battleground in the "war on terror" is the battle of ideological propaganda and counter-propaganda. Not the one where we drop bombs on people who are already radicalized.

 

[Maxim726X]

I'd like to know the answer to that stat, but my guess it upwards of 80%.

... How long does a Google search take?

 

[Orbis Tabula]

%100 is the only option? well we might as well do nothing then.

There's plnety we could do to move towards far less.

Oh, no. I agree. There are things we can do that we should do, even if it doesn't lead to one hundred percent. Maybe my point wasn't clear.

The poster I was responding to said something along the lines of "Obama had a strategy that I liked, but now it appears that a terrorist attack has happened, so now I think he has the wrong strategy." So the poster I was responding to changed their mind on Obama's plan when it wasn't 100% effective, implying they want a plan that is. My post is in response to that notion. What I was trying to say is "If one failure is enough to deter you from any strategy, is it even possible for there to be a strategy that satisfies you?" I agree that we should pursue reasonable strategies to prevent tragedies, even with the knowledge that there doesn't seem to be a 100% effective solution, and that terror attacks always have a non-zero chance of happening.

 

[PopeReal]

I find it funny that you guys think illegal arms are not a thing. lets say that all guns are banned in the US 100% like there are in other countries.

1. do you porpose that the government goes house to house to take guns (over 300 million legally purchased guns, unknown ILLLEGAL guns)
2. criminals wont commit violent crimes with their illegal guns
3. take away rights from law biding citizens to protect them selves, their hobbies, etc.


in my view, criminals will always have access to weapons. Look at mexico, firearms are banned there. Regular people cannot defend themselves and its has one of the highest murder rates in the world. GUESS WHAT criminals still have weapons.

a lot of people are uneducated when it comes to gun laws that are in place NOW.

1. fully automatic weapons were banned in the 1980s. any that you see now, are illegal or they have been sold privately. usually well above $25k or more cus you cant get new ones

2. "semi-automatic weapons" is just a scary sounding term for what it really means. you pull the trigger once, 1 shot fires.

3. there are no "loop holes" to get guns. You can buy online, but it has to be shipped to a store with an FFL license which then runs a background check . at a gun show, you have to get a background check. there is already a "cool off" period in place which varies by state.

4. private sales need no back ground check becuase its impossible to track who sells their property.

5. magazine limits are already a thing

people want to ban "assault rifles" when they dont even know what that means. an AR15 (semi automatic) is not an assault rifle. Hunting rifles, which people say they dont want to ban has a way more powerfull projectile that will travel way further does all the same thing an AR does. its just not black and "scary" looking.

people overlook that the vast majority of gun violence/firearm deaths are from hand guns.

im sure i forgot a lot of things to put in there, but i like to let ppl know some facts before they start talking about something they are ignorant on.

please ask me any questions you may have.

The classic nothing can be done argument. Yet other countries have much less gun violence than we do. Oh well. Nothing can be done.

 

[Ljx718]

Access to guns is part of the answer because the country has gashed its states' mental health budgets to the bone. You have people who aren't getting services they need, disgruntled, with easy access to weapons of destruction. Yes, USA has always had a hands-off attitude with guns, but there had also been a strong support structure for its citizens until about 10 years ago. What we are seeing in this country is the fruit of the conscience decision of under-funding public services due to recession/greed/need for increase profits. The chances of getting mental health services back in state's budgets is a decade a way, at best. So limiting access to murder tools is a short term solution.

i agree with you 100%. Which its why it bothers me when people say guns is the MAIN issue. its not. the other reasons you said is exactly what im saying

 

[Maxim726X]

You don't have to part of an organization to adopt its ideology.

That's why I've come to believe that the most important battleground in the "war on terror" is the battle of ideological propaganda and counter-propaganda. Not the one where we drop bombs on people who are already radicalized.

And that's the best strategy.

But sadly, that takes years and millions of dollars... And American lives. None of which American citizens are willing to part with.

 

[dave is ok]

I'd like to know the answer to that stat, but my guess it upwards of 80%.

Here you go.

http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015

286 are either unknown or unidentified, but I'd be shocked if the remaining 67 comes close to your 80% guesstimate

 

[Ljx718]

The classic nothing can be done argument. Yet other countries have much less gun violence than we do. Oh well. Nothing can be done.

we have over 360 million people with more spending power. There will be gun violence here. who said nothing can be done? things are being done, laws are in place. what im porposing is that when ppl say something should be done, give a constructive arguement as to what should be done. not just "we need common sense gun control" that means nothing.

im giving people facts here so they can go research more and see what they can porpose. if not, this is just one big ecco chamber of "something needs to be done"

 

[benjipwns]

The classic nothing can be done argument. Yet other countries have much less gun violence than we do. Oh well. Nothing can be done.

It's not that "nothing can be done" it's that the costs outweigh the benefits.

 

[Kinyou]

Makes me think it was just a post saying she supports ISIS and not any kind of communication. I still think this was a homegrown kinda deal with no real connection to the actual ISIS organization.

Hasn't Isis issued a general call to arms to Muslims living in the west? Might be that the connection is just that tangential.

 

[dabig2]

things

I see where you're coming from. Now here's where most of us are coming from:
The NRA Is Wrong: The Myth of Illegal Guns

There is a prolific myth in the United States which asserts that illegal firearms are easily obtainable. Bolstered by pro-gun lobbyists like the NRA, we are led to believe that, in most cities in America, there is a shady character on a particular street corner who will sell a gun to anybody, no questions asked, and because of this, there is no reason to eliminate loopholes allowing legal sales of firearms to, well, shady characters.

I’m a convicted felon who lives in the Bronx. Despite the nonviolent nature of my crimes—my convictions range from counterfeiting to felony shoplifting to possession of narcotics and drug paraphernalia—I cannot legally purchase a firearm. But given my somewhat shady past (not to mention the Bronx being the Bronx), I’m fairly certain that I could find a shady character close to home who will sell me a gun illegally—with three caveats: I’d risk being sent back to prison if caught, I would be putting my life in danger, and the price of weapons bought in such deals can be in excess of five times their retail cost. To put this in perspective, the assault weapon that Adam Lanza used to murder 20 children and six adults in Newtown, Connecticut, last December, which has a retail value of between $1,000 and $2,000, could cost between $5,000 and $10,000 on the streets.

My point is that purchasing firearms illegally should be an ordeal, and that effective background checks would be the first step in making it so. But what’s also pertinent is that Lanza was not a shady character with a long criminal history, and so would have had no experience moving in illicit circles. Background checks may have forced him to do so—to risk being arrested, robbed, or even killed in some dark alley for the substantial sum he’d have needed in order to buy a gun illegally.

There is, of course, a legitimate argument that background checks would not have prevented the Newtown massacre. This is likely true, but it’s also equally true that Lanza would have been denied easy access to legal firearms if his mother, the purchaser and owner of the assault weapons he used (and the first one to be murdered by Lanza) had utilized trigger locks and/or a gun safe—prudent safety features that any good NRA member would wholeheartedly advocate.

But let’s suppose for a minute that she did, and that Lanza, after failing a background check, would have had to purchase his weapons from some inner-city shady character. Can any levelheaded American honestly picture Adam Lanza, the spineless murderer of children, gaining the confidence of hardened, street-level arms dealers?

And let’s not stop there. What if Jared Loughner or James Holmes had to go out into the streets and risk their lives to obtain their weapons? Loughner killed six and injured 14 in Tucson, Arizona, in January 2011, and Holmes is responsible for murdering 12 and wounding 58 in Aurora, Colorado, in July of last year. It would have been an ordeal for them to buy illegal weapons simply because, like Lanza, they were not immersed in lawlessness.

When pro-gun lobbyists insist that it’s relatively easy for criminals to obtain firearms illegally, they have the luxury of categorizing Lanza, Loughner, and Holmes as criminals because it is after the fact of their crimes. But if you examine the scenario before the fact, it’s plain to see that you’re dealing with sick individuals whose criminal proclivities existed solely in their minds. Their first step in becoming criminals was getting their hands on guns and ammunition. Holmes and Loughner, in particular, were able to buy their weapons legally, passing the nominal background checks that currently exist with ease. So the question remains: how do we mold an effective law that would flag psychotics attempting to buy guns?

Every inmate admitted into the Arizona Department of Corrections is required to take a mandatory psych test. I took it on four separate occasions, one for each time I was sentenced to an Arizona state prison. The test runs about two hours and was quite proficient at identifying the mentally disturbed—especially those prone to violence. Incoming inmates who failed this test were automatically removed from general population and redirected for further psychological evaluation.

This simple test should be mandatory for any individual who wishes to purchase a firearm.

Which brings us back to the original question: how easy would it have been for Lanza, Loughner, and Holmes to have purchased their weapons illegally? In response I challenge any pro-gun lobbyist and/or pundit to pocket a few thousand dollars and head out alone into the streets of any major city, find a shady character, and purchase a firearm illegally in the same manner that a psychotic and/or criminal would have to do if we had effective background checks in place.

But all this is, of course, academic, since a watery background-check bill was recently defeated by the Senate, leaving me to wonder if there aren’t a lot more shady characters out there than we are led to believe.

 

[samn]

Again, any nuked dropped will result in mutually assured destruction. NO ONE wants to be responsible for that will bring.

I think you underestimate how reckless leaders can be.

JFK risked nuclear war just to save his own face.

 

[Maxim726X]

I think you underestimate how reckless leaders can be.

JFK risked nuclear war just to save his own face.

This was my point. Fear and overwhelming public sentiment can lead to terrible things.

Also, I have no idea how bombing ISIS would lead to MAD or WW3, but I digress...

 

[Soapbox Killer]

Not trying to make light but ISIS reminds me of those super villain groups in the movies. I just hope we have a super hero group of our own in some iso bunker ready to surge.

 

[Lime]

Time to get serious about this problem.
And we know where it starts.

US imperialism, gun laws, and lack of a social & health care system?

 

[Rollo Tomasi]

Weren't guns purchased over a span of a few years? I'm pretty sure Farouk had purchased some of the weapons years before he ever met his wife.

Yes, there was even reports that he and his sister did target practice in the backyard of their family home.

 

[Nesotenso]

I guess that explains the go-pro cameras they were allegedly wearing. Go murder some "infidels" and post the carnage online to embolden other would-be jihadists.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a rash of copycat attacks in the coming weeks.

wasn't this said to be false by the police?

 

[Ljx718]

I see where you're coming from. Now here's where most of us are coming from:
The NRA Is Wrong: The Myth of Illegal Guns

For it to be a myth, it means its not true. i grew up in miami and not in a overly bad neighborhood. i was poor growing up and i knew exactly where to go and get a gun illegally and cheaper than at a gun store. This is why i know it can happen. after this i will try to find the stats of the % of people in prison for gun crimes that were legally purchased. i believe, if i remember correctly, it was in the 20s.

I just want people here, twitter, anywhere to have an honest converstaion of what can be done that can be effective.

 

[Fenderputty]

I guess that explains the go-pro cameras they were allegedly wearing. Go murder some "infidels" and post the carnage online to embolden other would-be jihadists.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a rash of copycat attacks in the coming weeks.

I thought go pro's weren't confirmed?

 

[Seventy70]

I get the feeling that the more aggressive we are with ISIS, the stronger they become. In a way, thinking of them as such a big threat kind of legitimatizes them.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

You don't have to part of an organization to adopt its ideology.

That's why I've come to believe that the most important battleground in the "war on terror" is the battle of ideological propaganda and counter-propaganda. Not the one where we drop bombs on people who are already radicalized.

Truth

 

[xDUMPWEEDx]

This is such a strange case.

It is. It sounds like it's a bit of both when it comes to workplace related violence/disgruntled employee and terrorism.

Farook's co-workers were his target. He could have easily went and killed random people after making his escape from the building.